Central Coalfields Limited vs State of Bihar (Jharkhand)

This is a petition for review of the judgment and order dated 22.1.2008 passed by the Division Bench in CWJC No. 1258 of 1995R by which the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous, in view of the contention raised at paragraph-2 of the writ petition as also on account of the information furnished by the Counsel for the petitioner.

This petition has now been filed for review of the aforesaid order, which essentially is in the nature of modification of the order, in the sense that the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous which, according to the averment of the petitioner, should not have been dismissed as infructuous but should have been dismissed on merit in view of the fact that a batch of similar other writ petitions were dismissed on merit wherein reasons were assigned.

It has, therefore, been submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that since the writ petitions which were of identical nature and were dismissed on merit, this writ petition also was fit to be dismissed on merit but not as infructuous. It was further submitted that dismissal of the writ petition as infructuous would come in the way of the petitioner to file an appeal before the Supreme Court and as several other appeals are pending before the Supreme Court against the judgment and orders which were passed in the batch of identical writ petitions, the order needs to be modified to the effect that the writ petition should be treated as dismissed on merit.

The Counsel for the respondents also conceded to this position that the similarly situated writ petitions have been dismissed with reasoned order against which appeals have been preferred before the Supreme Court and those writ petitions were dismissed on 22.1.2008 prior to dismissal of the writ petition of the petitioner as infructuous.

In fact, it was the duty of the Counsel for the petitioner to furnish the accurate information to the Court when the order was passed on 22.1.2008 as the said order ''dismissed as infructuous'' was passed clearly relying on the averments at para-2 of the writ petition and the Counsel should have apprised the Court that when the writ petition was filed, the other similarly situated matters , although were admitted and pending for hearing, those writ petitions had finally been dismissed prior to 22.1.2008 , so that the matter of the petitioner could have been dismissed on merit instead of its dismissal: as infructuous.

However, since the petitioner is keen to avail the right of appeal before the Supreme Court on account of the fact that the appeals on similar footing are pending before the Supreme Court, we deem it just and appropriate to modify the order dated 22.1.2008 to the extent that the, writ petition shall be treated as dismissed on merit, in view of the reasons assigned in a batch of civil writ petitions being C.W.J.C. No. 555 of 1994(R), CWJC No. 3198 of 1995(R) and CWJC No. 558 of 1994(R) and the petitioner also being on similar footing, the writ petition(CWJC No. 1258 of 1995R) shall be treated ''dismissed on merit'' and will not be read dismissed as infructuous.

The review petition, accordingly, is disposed of.